Some of my recurring blog themes include topics such as knowing yourself, your working style, and your strengths and weaknesses. By knowing yourself and your tendencies, you can better figure out how to get yourself out of ruts, how to ask for help, or how to make it through a difficult situation in the lab or in the office. As part of my interest in scientific ‘self-help’, I love reading about personality assessments and combing through the theories about my own or my colleagues’ ‘types’. I use the information to think about how to communicate with other people better and also how to recognize my own shortfalls and to work to correct them.

My mother and I share the same interest in observing people and their personalities. Recently she talked to me about Gretchen Rubin’s four tendencies, a personality test that distinguishes people by the way respond to internal and external expectations. I enjoyed the simple and clear presentation, and, while I was initially skeptical of its applicability (probably due to the type of tendency I fall into), I feel it’s relevant for understanding how we work in the lab and in a research setting.

You can read all about the theory behind Rubin’s tendencies on her website, but in a nutshell a person’s tendency boils down to how he or she follows instructions. In her book ‘Better than Before’, Rubin focuses on applying this theory towards changing habits, whether it be to exercise three times a week or to call your mom more often so you can discuss your entire family’s Rubin tendency distribution. It’s probably not initially clear what relevance this personality test could have in your scientific career, but as with most jobs, you spend a good portion of your day handling a lot of instructions: what your principal investigator wants, what your company/university wants, what you want, and at some point you’ll also be the one giving out instructions to others. At the same time that we receive information and instruction from various sources, we also make decisions on when do we decide to take breaks and how we decide which tasks to prioritize.

I’ll leave the details of the theory and the typologies to Rubin to describe in detail, but let’s get some context for what these four tendencies are, how they may manifest given that you work in a research-type setting, and what the potential strengths and weaknesses are in the lab for each type. But first thing’s first: take the test. No, really, it’s crucial for the rest of this post! It’s a short questionnaire and only a few questions long. And as with any personality test: be sure to answer truthfully to yourself. Respond as you would respond in that situation, and try to really picture yourself in the setting for each question.

Assuming that you have now taken the quiz and have been assigned your personality, we can discuss its implications. Rubin’s four personality types first came to be in 2013 and have now grown in detail and structure. The tendencies are also part of Rubin’s The Happiness Project, where she goes into detail of strategies for changing habits based on what types of expectations you follow the most. These descriptions come directly from her website and are referred to as either the Rubin Personality Index or the Rubin Tendencies. We like Rubin Tendencies, so we’ll stick with that one. The four tendencies are obligers, upholders, questioners, and REBELS. In the quote below, ‘rules’ also refer to instruction, or really any type of expectation.

“Upholders respond to both inner and outer rules; Questioners question all rules, but can follow rules they endorse (effectively making all rules into inner rules); REBELS resist all rules; Obligers respond to outer rules but not to inner rules.- Upholders wake up and think, “What’s on the schedule and the to-do list for today?” They’re very motivated by execution, getting things accomplished. They really don’t like making mistakes, getting blamed, or failing to follow through (including doing so to themselves).- Questioners wake up and think, “What needs to get done today?” They’re very motivated by seeing good reasons for a particular course of action. They really don’t like spending time and effort on activities they don’t agree with.
- REBELS wake up and think, “What do I want to do today?” They’re very motivated by a sense of freedom, of self-determination. They really don’t like being told what to do.- Obligers wake up and think, “What must I do today?” They’re very motivated by accountability. They really don’t like being reprimanded or letting others down. “Quoted from Gretchen Rubin blog, 27 March 2013

So now that you’ve done the quiz, what do you think of this short assessment of yourself? Do you wake up every morning thinking about what your Rubin tendency says you do? You can read in more detail about your own Rubin Tendency if you’re interested. After reading the detailed reports for the four Rubin tendencies, here’s our own shortened interpretation of them:

- Upholders are great doers and achievers, but may struggle if there’s no clarity or no plan.- Questioners are very internally motivated, but may run into issues if they can’t accept worthwhile direction or advice from others.
- REBELS have great ambition and creativity, but may resist following direction if they don’t feel like they can do what they want on their own time.- Obligers are reliable and dependable, but may have issues with being too self-sacrificing and spend time building up others before themselves.

While Rubin focuses on how types related to habits and her books show you how to create good habits based on what your type is, in this post I instead wanted to highlight some common scenarios that can come up in research and how each type might get caught up with and a potential solution/approach.
​Upholders: The to-do list masters who may run into progress speed bumps with things like:

Need to do something new in the lab and unsure of how to proceed because there’s currently no plan or detailed protocol available.

Has a day in between experiments of unstructured time, and not sure how to go about more nebulous tasks like reading relevant literature or brainstorming new experiments.

Can obsess with minute details of experiments and may believe that datasets are unusable if a small step doesn’t get done exactly perfectly or is done slightly differently than before.

Has a hard time looking beyond what’s been done already to what’s possible.

Can give great presentations when following a plan of action, but if a question comes that isn’t expected may be unsure of how to approach if slightly beyond the project outline.

What can upholders do? You’ve already got a great work ethic, now you just need to figure out how to think on your feet and think outside the box:

Set up a lab journal club to give a structured environment for literature review.

Ask your PI if they can set aside time to discuss new ideas for experiments and analyses and ask them to describe their creative thinking process during the discussion.

Discuss important parts of protocols with senior lab members and PIs so you can develop a clearer understanding of which parts are crucial and which can be flexible.

Try to not just look at what the details or expectations are details but instead try to focus on the core of why things are there. Learn how to focus on the core, not just the rules that guide them.

Join an improv class, take swing dance lessons, or go on a blind date (even if it’s just to meet a new friend). Seek out chances to practice thinking and reacting on the spot.

Questioners: Good at critically evaluating everything…except sometimes themselves! Here are the issues that these constant wonderers of ‘why’ can fall into:

Not likely to follow advice from PI, direction from a committee, or even a lab protocol if they don’t agree with the reasoning or believe it’s a valid approach or idea.

Will take time to foster their own ideas and their own work but may not be as open to collaborations where they’ll be told what to do instead of exploring their own ideas.

May stay stuck on a problem because they are too focused on thinking about the idea and fixing it on their own, and may find it hard to ask for help or advice when it’s really needed.

Asks too many questions instead of accepting some things as fact or as standard operating procedures.

Tendency to procrastinate on administrative tasks or any mundane tasks that need to get done but that aren’t directly important to them or their project’s progress.

What can questioners do? Asking a lot of questions is a good tendency in science, as long as that critical evaluation is evenly distributed and fair. To give yourself a fair assessment, work on the following:

Take your own time to work out and understand the ‘why’ of each rule, instruction, and step in the protocol. Use the data you collect to ensure that you follow the important rules instead of deciding from just your own perspective of what’s correct and what should be followed.

Work on internalizing any external obligations (collaborations, work for other lab members, administrative tasks, etc) and as a ‘carrot’ you can award yourself with time to work on your own interests/projects after you complete an external obligation.

Strive to obtain a balance between your own ideas and ideas/suggestions of other people, knowing that this balance is crucial to your own success because of the complexity of research and science today.

Learn to accept other people’s working styles instead of asking them why or criticizing. Not everyone will ask as many questions as you, and that’s part of what makes you an important member of a group. You may have to listen to instructions that you don’t agree with but in the end your efforts will be more than if you try to do it all on your own.

REBELS: Will challenge ideas and reach for the skies…but may have a hard time getting there if they don’t listen to others. Here’s what trouble REBELS can run into in the lab:

Will not likely to respond to direct suggestions of tasks, project ideas, timelines, or anything that isn’t in line with their personal goals.

Not prone to following directions or guidelines, be they in the lab or from a PI.

Sees their own ideas and goals as more worthy of pursuing than the suggestions or hard work done by others.

May at times respond to suggestions by doing the exact opposite, just because they were told to do something and wanted to go against being told what to do.

What can REBELS do? It may sound like a hard sell to be a good REBEL scientist at first, but one of the things that makes rebels great is that they go against the grain-think of all the great paradigm shifts in science that came from looking at the status quo and saying ‘no’! Nonetheless, you do have to play by the book, at least a little bit:

Make a list of your personal goals and try to incorporate them into the other tasks, responsibilities, and assignments that you’re given.

Focus on the direct benefits to yourself for each task. Whether it be a paper, a new contact for your network, or simply making your PI happy before a committee meeting, think of how the work you do for others can benefit you in the long-term instead of satisfying a short-term need.

Bring a part of you and your own goals/sense style into every aspect of a project. Your unique flair is what can bring a new perspective to a project that might need a change in direction.

Inspire others to work with you by sharing your ideas and your goals with others.

Look ahead to your future: What’s your ideal work setting? What does your dream job look like? Once you visualize your goals, figure out what you need in order to get there.

Obligers: You’re everyone’s favorite, most helpful lab mate, but your own work will go un-worked on if you have a job to do for someone else. Here are some other situations that an obliger may run into:

Feels like they don’t have time to work on their own project, especially when it comes to finishing a dissertation or thesis project.

May not be able to work effectively unless there is a firm deadline or there is pressure to get something done (i.e. ‘we need this data analyzed or we won’t get an extension on the grant’).

Is able to find things to distract them from their own project, including but not limited to work that is communally beneficial (e.g. lab dishes) or working on side projects for collaborators.

Can be more focused on meeting external commitments instead of internal ones, even for small tasks such as submitting travel reimbursements or other minor administrative tasks, and wants these external commitments (however minor) to be done on time and to perfection.

What can obligers do? It’s hard to put yourself first, so here’s some tips on how you can look at your internal obligations with an external focus:

Ask your PI to set deadlines and schedules for you, especially when writing your dissertation. Ask them not to make arbitrary deadlines but to help you meet your goals by keeping tabs on you and not letting you put it off again and again until the next submission deadline.

Set a daily schedule with your mentors and collaborators to give yourself a set amount of time in the day or week where you work on your own tasks. Ask your PI to make sure they are clear that that is a blocked set of time for you to not be bothered by other work.

Ask a lab mate to keep you accountable to yourself-have them ask you if you worked on your thesis, finished the report for your project, and in other words to keep tabs on you for yourself.

Visualize yourself as a role model, both in your current career and in the career you want in the future. You want to show your students and collaborators that your ideas and work has value, so be sur to show them that you’re as committed to your own work as to theirs.

The thing I like about the Rubin tendencies in the context of research is that it highlights the need for teamwork. There is no one perfect personality type for academic research: we all have to challenge currently held perceptions, knowledge, and ideas, but also have to know when to follow the rules and respect the knowledge already in play. We have to strike a balance between working towards our own goals and recognizing the value of working with others. The key with integrating the tendencies in your own research career is first to recognize which tendency you follow the most and to work towards ensuring that you stay on task for your own career goals. Additional life hack: find friends and collaborators who exhibit different tendencies than you have to balance out the scales. Whoever said that psycho-analyzing your friends and co-workers couldn't be fun or useful!!